Saturday, November 05, 2005

Saturday Sports Review

Well I went to the UK game today against my better judgement, mostly because we had our big offensive playmakers back from injuries. And as usual I left at half time. On the outside it would seem like the same old song and dance. But it wasn't. For those who couldn't see the game, here's what went down:

-UK scores first, and although they gave up a TD quickly after that, they appeared as if they had come to play today, which doesn't occur often. Flash forward to the second quarter, where Auburn is up 14-10 on the 50 yard line, 2nd and 10. Brandon Cox launches a deep, sky-high jump ball down the sideline, where the Auburn reciever has no chance to make a play because the UK cornerback managed to force him to the sideline and out of bounds. But wait....just after the reciever goes out of bounds, he steps back in bounds, makes the catch, and runs into the endzone for the TD. Well the general consensus. even among Auburn fans, was that the play would be ruled as incomplete. But wait...to the horror of the 60,000 expectant stands in the stadium, the officials rule that the UK conerback pushed the reciever out of bounds, and the pass is ruled complete and the TD stands.

-Instant replay CLEARLY shows that the Auburn reciever not only stepped out of bounds, but actually pushed the UK cornerback aside so as to get to the ball. So to sum it all up: UK cornerback plays good defense, forces reciever out of bounds without touching him. Auburn reciever commits offensive pass interference, goes out of bounds, comes back inbounds, catches ball, runs in for TD. UK player: nice legal play, no penaly committed, 7 points for the other team. Auburn player: 2 penalties committed, 7 points for his team. And here's the kick: the play can't be reviewed.

- Then the real fun begins. For the first time ever, Rich Brooks (and Mike Archer) shows that he actually gives a rip about the outcome of the game by getting in a very heated argument with the officials, which resulted in two sideline encroachment penalties, allowing Auburn to kick-off from the UK 35 yard-line. Fans boo and scream murder for 10 minutes. They throw things on the field. When Auburn finally kicks off, the ball sails into the stands, and the fans take it and throw it ouf the stadium. At halftime, the officials are again greeted with boos and are ushered off the field by several security gaurds. It was almost like Ernie Flethcer had showed up at the game again.

-So here is the fallout: UK ends up losing anyway. So why should I care? That's a good question. My thoughts on the matter.

1) I don't have as much of a problem with the officials missing a call as I do them not being able to review the play. For some reason beyond my realm of knowledge, plays such as these are not reviewable, which brings me to my big question: why bother with instant replay when almost everything is not-reviewable. Honestly, the only plays I have seen reviewed have been those where: a) a fumble occured and the officials need to see if the players knee was down or not b) whether a pass was complete or incomplete (i.e. traps, possession, one foot inbounds, etc.) But wait.....wasn't play a question of whether or not the pass was complete? I am going to guess that the reason it was not reviewed is because a "penalty" was involved. But no penalty flag was thrown that I saw. And even if there was, why shouldn't you be able to review a special case like this, where a reciever RAN OUT OF BOUNDS and then came back in? That at least should have been reviewed, then it would have been evident that it was the Auburn reciever who committed the penalty. And would it be so wrong to be able to review some penalties? I am not saying that we should review things like holding or offsides. But major penalties like pass interference and personal foul calls, where the penalty makes a huge difference on the outcome of the play, shouldn't we at least consider reviewing some of these? And for those who would say that it would slow the game down too much because so many plays would be reviewed, I say this: why not let the coaches have 3 challenges like in the NFL, thus reducing the number of reviews in a game? Isn't it better to get the call right? The idea behind using instant replay is that it is able to see things that the officials can't. Remember a year or two ago when the Tennessee player pushed the Florida player, and the Florida player punched him in the helmet? Both were at fault, but only the UF player was penalized. The penalty kept the drive alive, and Tennessee won. Now what if that was reviewable? What would have the outcome be had they made the right call?

It just seems to me that we have this replay to get things right but we don't ever use them when it is really needed.......

2) On the other hand, it made me happy to see Rich Brooks get fired up. I still disagree with his play calls, his coaching methods, etc., but I was gald to see him show a little excitement. It reminded me of the time when Guy Morriss punched a wall in the locker room during half-time of a game, breaking his hand. (By the way, UK came out fired up and won.)

3) Bottom line: did it really change the outcome of the game? Probably not. Howver it came at a time when UK was very much in the game; had the pass been incomplete it would have been 3rd and 10, and there could have been a nice defensice stop made. But more than that, UK made a great play on the ball and got called for a bogus penalty. It was demoralizing, and it's effects carried over throughout the rest of the game. John Wiley, who was sitting next to me during the whole debacle, put it well: WE CAN'T CATCH A BREAK. And it's true. We get injured like no other team I have ever seen. We make a big play, but it is called back for a petty penalty. And then there are occurences like today.


I'm not blaming the UK loss on the refs. They lost the game because they gave up over 300 yards on the ground. Like I said earlier, it probably wouldn't have changed the outcome of the game that much; it's the principle of the matter.

I feel bad for the players. I feel bad for the fans. Heck, I even feel bad for the coaches for once. The officials got this call dead wrong: replay showed it, and even unbiased ESPN writers who recapped the game admitted that it was a terrible call. But it "couldn't be reviewed", and there is a chance that the outcome could have been different. That's why I am upset.

-In other sports news, Philadelphia Eagles suspended Terrell Owens indefinitley. In other words, the Philadelphia Eagles told their little kid to go to his room and think about what he did untill they say that it is alright for him to go back outside and play.

-Well Tapp was right: Vince Young did not run for 267 yards against Baylor. Instead he threw for 300. And the Horns won 62-0.

posted by Wes @ 6:54 PM

5 Comments:

At 11/06/2005 04:09:00 PM, Blogger d blake said...

the google ads have returned! the extra 25 cents per month in income was too much to pass up?

 
At 11/06/2005 04:30:00 PM, Blogger Wes said...

I never got rid of them to begin with

 
At 11/06/2005 04:39:00 PM, Blogger JTapp said...

I saw a blatant bad call in the California/Oregon game. The Oregon CB clearly & blatantly interfered twice with the receiver who was trying to catch a crucial 4th quarter game-winning score on the 5 yard line. The ABC announcers said it was clearly "home cooking."

Blame it on The Curse. I've not seen a big-time game where questionable calls against UK weren't made.

Baylor lost the A&M game "unreviewable" calls, too. Both on possesion questions or receptions. Morriss called the league office to find out what in the world was reviewable.

NCAA football is the greatest game to watch, but the most corrupt in officiating and ranking systems.

 
At 11/07/2005 03:13:00 PM, Blogger d blake said...

guess i wasn't paying attention to the google ads.

 
At 11/07/2005 03:14:00 PM, Blogger d blake said...

i don't see the google ads today... i guess my machine at work blocks them... yesterday i was at the library.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home